Westminstenders: Pragmatism versus Purity

[RedToothBrush]

There is one question for the HoC in the next week and that's will you persue pragmatism or purity?

May looks as if she is being sidelined after a backbench withdrawal of support, the DUPs withdrawal of support and an omminous silence eminenating from the Cabinet.

Her speech on Thursday where she pitted the people against parliament has been her last mistake. She's now a danger to the country's stability and the safety of MPs.

The priority for the week is to pass the SI to change the UK exit date from 29th March to the EU's new terms.

After that, with May's deal stuffed due to lack of support and a Bercow ruling it looks like we are facing some sort of indicative free vote. This seems to be being supported by ministers in government regardless of leave or remain.

The prospect of a Tory Leader Election contest looms. It remains to seen if that can happen in the next three weeks with so much else at stake. But this is the Tory party.

The penny seems to be finally dropping about the reality of leaving the EU and how we leave the EU. A week before we were due to go. The incompetence of Parliament is laid bare in all its glorious full scale.

horehound Not having a vote = not passed

So if the UK want another extension, we would have to do 2 things by 12 April:

• the HoC must have voted to participate in EU elections
  The 12 April was chosen because it is the last possible date for the Uk to legally organise EP elections
  These can be cancelled if we Brexit before 23 May, the EP elections date

• present a plan what to do next, which convinces the EU that an extension is worth the bother

present a plan what to do next, which convinces the EU that an extension is worth the bother

Would TM being ousted and another referendum count as ‘worth the bother’?

I followed the link given in Guardian to the PM's office and let them know they should add another couple to the march numbers as we would have been there if we could have been.
It isn't the same as being there but felt better than nothing.

.

Normally, I would expect / hope that if on 12 April, the Uk govt were enmeshed in a leadership crisis and totally paralysed,
the EU would take pity on a helpless charity case

BUT
the EP elections deadline scuppers that

• no charity to your disfunctional neighbour if it brings your own house down

So at least the HoC needs to vote for EP elections before then
In case they & the govt can't agree on a plan

Problem is: we seem to have worn out their patience
One tends not to give charity to someone yelling threats & insults at you, while continually making terrible choices.

Looking at the Revoke petition map, I note that Zac Goldsmith's constituency has 20,605/16.93% of his constituents (so it would be a higher percentage of his electorate ) who have signed.

He has a majority of 45 . Not 4,500, not 450, forty five

I would hope that if May was deposed and someone else went to the EU27 waving a white flag, olive leaf and grovelling / apologising for the behaviour and intransigence of May, they may be more sympathetic to our cause. If we send May again, I think they'd be more likely to cut us free, as they've acknowledged that she is a MASSIVE part of the problem.

We need to get some decision made this forthcoming week and go to the EU27 the week after, if possible, not leave it until 10-11 April. You get more sympathy for being organised, IME, too!

It's an important point, pretty
that MPs will be looking at their own consituency in that petition

It could actually have real effect, especially on waverers considering No Deal rather than backing down

There are 57 Conservative Seats with majorities of less than 4,000

fluffy The EU would want actions by the HoC,
because anything else just says that person - the new PM ? - either doesn't mean it
or can't deliver it

Voting to hold EP elections would be the minimum necessary condition
because the UK after 1 July without MEPs undermines the legality of the entire EP

I'm not saying the HoC don't have to be involved. Maybe I need to spell everything out to prevent the picking at what I'm saying.

But the entire HoC won't be going to the EU27 because that would be stupid. I'm talking about AFTER the HoC votes.

I'm typing left-thumbed due to having had shoulder surgery on my dominant hand. I simply can't do long posts explaining the background to what I'm saying.

And I KNOW we need the elections. I said that on the last thread.

I'm not an idiot.

I posted along these lines towards the end of the last thread:

To get the extension to 22 May, then Parliament has to vote for the WA, including the backstop, and PD as it stands (although the EU might be prepared to accept some changes to the PD as all it does it provide guidelines to the actual trade/relationship negotiations which only start after we leave ), by 12 April. The extension is only a technical one to allow the UK to pass the enabling legislation.

If Parliament doesn't pass the WA by 12 April, then unless we have used that time constructively to pass legislation to hold EU elections in May, We. Will. Crash. Out. No ifs, no buts.

The UK can also choose to revoke until 12 April (if the WA hasn't passed), or, in theory, until 22 May if the WA had passed therefore highly unlikely

Those are the only absolutes.

If, over the next few weeks, Parliament somehow manages to agree formally (and pass the legislation) to hold a clearly defined PV (Corbyn, I'm looking at you ), then the EU might agree to a longer extension - but it is under no obligation to do so.

Ditto with a GE.

But both those latter options will require participation in the EU Parliament elections.

It's as existential to the EU (which, contrary to "popular" opinion, is a democracy ) as the 4 Pillars of the Single Market that the Brexiters and those negotiating on behalf of the UK keep crashing into. The E27 are not going to risk the legitimacy of the EU Parliament.

May has irritated the EU, but at that level they rise above personalities
What matters is that any successor can deliver something useful.

May is in office, but not in power
Would her successor be any better able to command a majority in the HoC to actually pass something acceptable to the EU ?
I hope they would look for cross-party support to offset the "incorrigables" in the DUP & (some of) ERG

All the smiles & smooching in the world won't help a new PM who goes to the EU with the same plea to change the backstop, either now or later

PMK thank you Red, will catch up later, hoping the March numbers are up, it’s hard trying to find estimate of numbers at the moment.

We are likely to have indicative votes, but I don't see any timing yet for a vote to call EP elections
Hopefully this will come, as we need this in place for all options except Revoke & No Deal

The HoC needs to do this by 12 April, or there won't be an extension,
whoever the PM is and whatever their cunning plan.

All the smiles & smooching in the world won't help a new PM who goes to the EU with the same plea to change the backstop, either now or later

Did I say that's what I thought would be an option? Again, I said on the last thread that I agreed with you that voting for cake is an exercise in futility.

I DO get the picture; I don't need you to explain that the impossible isn't possible.

What I do have is real life experience of negotiations (clearly not of this importance, but I understand power play and personalities and these affect negotiations) and, actually, the EU27 already said they were saving us from May's lack of Plan B, so they've acknowledged her personality deficit. Hence me saying somebody new and contrite and willing to discuss options and come up with ideas / compromise will get on better.

The march must definitely have over a million on it as the BBC State Broadcaster is reporting hundreds of thousands

Brexit march: Hundreds of thousands join referendum protest
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47678763#

www.livefrombrexit.com/petitions/241584

This constantly updates to show vote numbers plus number/percentage for each constituency.
So far 28% of Corbyn’s constituents have signed the revoke petition.
What does he think he’s doing wooing leave voters in Morecambe ?
And before anyone accuses me of slagging off Morecambe, I’m not.
It’s a very nice place which I often visit. However sadly it is very economically depressed so chances are it will have a large percentage of leave voters.

If Sky are correct that Government is considering allowing MPs to vote on 7 alternative Brexit options this coming week

Timothy Garton Ash@fromTGA

#euco #article50 extension decision was tough but rational.

^UK now has

fluffy there’s a few on these threads who seem to think we need the bleedin obvious pointed out at every opportunity, that we don’t understand what the backstop is for and who also think their word is gospel.

It’s unfortunate as so much of the content is very valid.

Pmk

There are a few who think we can substantially change the WA terms, not just the PD
Unfortunately, according to Soubry, that includes a lot of MPs, or did until recently
So not that obvious.

Unfortuantely, Fluffy (I can't stop thinking of the ineffectual Secretary of State for Scotland every time I see you name ), I don't see anyone "new and contrite and willing to discuss options and come up with ideas / compromise" emerging from the Conservative Party in time Dominic Grieve or Ken Clarke might be able to do it, but they are never going to be chosen by the MPs, let along the Conservative Party membership.

The only hope is a successful Vote of No Confidence - and there quite simply isn't the time for that to go through the process before 12 April.

So it is still a choice, as BigChoc says, between crash out on 12 April, Revoke, pass the WA, or put in place the legislation for EP elections by the 12th. A new leader or the Indicative Votes will only help - but are no guarantee - in persuading the EU to grant us an extension if we have put in place the legislation for EP elections.

There are a few who think we can substantially change the WA terms

Yes, because there’s no evidence to the contrary.

New direction for Brexit, new WA.

I am listening to what the EU says:

The WA cannot be changed, but the future relationship can be
(thanks to indistinct on old thread for the link)

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-barnier/eu-open-to-closer-ties-with-britain-but-no-renegotiation-of-withdrawal-deal-idUKKCN1PA0PZ

“If the United Kingdom chooses to let its red lines change in future
and that it takes this choice for its advantage of the ambition of going beyond a simple but not negligible free trade accord,
then the European Union would be ready immediately to ... respond favourably,” Barnier said.
.....
Asked if Barnier was suggesting reworking that outline of future ties, the EU executive’s chief spokesman told reporters:

“The withdrawal agreement - and, I repeat, the withdrawal agreement - ... is not open for renegotiation.”